> HI Mike,
>
> I think the reason you're having such difficulty communicating here,
I've been following this discussion closely since I need to be aware of the
best-practice for using the tracker. It strikes me that Mike has been extremely
clear about how the issue tracker is to be used, and I would like to thank him
for taking the time to make it explicit. Mike, could you perhaps add a note to
the tracker page itself or to the WG home page summarizing the correct use of
the tracker so that everyone is aware of how it is to be used going forward? I
appreciate you have already spent some considerable time on this issue, but
since the issue tracker has slightly different operating procedures from a
typical bug database I can foresee this issue arising again.
> While I think everyone in the WG welcomes your enthusiasm — it’s great
> to have a staff contact take such a close interest in the daily
> activities of the WG — you're clearly overstepping your bounds in
> suggesting the WG wants you to delete these issues from the issue-
> tracker. What the WG wants from you is to dutifully serve as a staff
> contact to the W3C, to serve as a liaison between the WG and the W3C
> and to help us all understand the procedures within which we're
> supposed to work.
Robert, I really think it is inappropriate for you to presume to speak for the
whole working group when you are not communicating an actual working group decision.
Speaking purely for myself, I am happy to see Mike taking in active role in
managing the HTMLWG community and I hope his efforts will result in a more
coordinated group and better signal/noise for those trying to follow the
discussions.
--
"Eternity's a terrible thought. I mean, where's it all going to end?"
-- Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead